nymr83

Jerry even went out to argue between innings, not something you usually see on area-out calls. Livan in trouble...

no way was the second baseman still on the bag when he caught the throw from 3B. They built $50,000 questec machines to tighten the strike zone and screw the pitchers, couldn't they have accomplished the same for free by not calling the "area out"?

maybe the Mets knew what they were doing when they signed Sheff.

really? what makes it a "fact"? the last time i tried making a statistical argument with you, cleon, you got us sent to the RLF and still have yet to respond with statistics to back your own point up. Edit- if you need your memory jogged, I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that Kaat was better than Blyleven. here's the link so you can't claim you can't find it [url:opoxbqpz]http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/7100/f8_t7111.shtml[/url:opoxbqpz]

]Don't feel bad I was basically deemed a jerkace for mentioning him as an ROY candidtate which he is no, he's not.

="Edgy DC":niwqtenf]Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it?[/quote:niwqtenf] I think he's talking about the percentage of ticket sales that goes to the visiting club, which predated the luxury tax and as far as i know continues today. Benjamin Grimm May 26 2009 10:02 AM I believe it does. Gate sharing has been around forever and is distinct from revenue sharing, which was introduced more recently as part of a collective bargaining agreement. Edgy DC May 26 2009 10:04 AM That's a good question, then. But owners kcertainly now enough not to let themselves get swindled by each other, no? Frayed Knot May 26 2009 10:32 AM ="Edgy DC"]Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it? Two separate things. Luxury tax is based on exceeding salary thresholds. Revenue sharing is based on various income lines and, yes, this all could be about that in the same way that's what luxury suites are all about. They're treated as rent rather than ticket sales and therefore aren't subject to the same cut of the gate as one Joe Sixpack buys. ]But owners kcertainly now enough not to let themselves get swindled by each other, no? Not necessarily. In the NFL - where ticket and broadcast money is all split nearly evenly - they were the first to rush into the luxury suite business (and demanding stadiums that accommodated them) and did so for the sole purpose of getting revenue they didn't have to share. Ditto PSLs. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2009 10:52 AM ="Gwreck"]There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. Funny thing-- as I've said a few times on here, the fiancee, a friend of mine and I cobbled together our "package" this year from Ebay-- with a little from Stubhub-- before single-gamers went on sale. With twenty minutes to kill until a lunch meeting, I just did the math. As it turns out, paying face-value or slightly above on Ebay-- where a good number of sellers offer free or discounted shipping-- has actually been about 41 dollars cheaper* than buying directly from the Mets would have been. (And that includes the Mother's Day game against the Pirates, for which I paid about 10 dollars over face per ticket.) *$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. G-Fafif May 26 2009 12:30 PM Yesterday was the first of six consecutive dates that had a Flushing Flash discount component available (first come/first served, buy in advance), indicating they had more inventory than planned for the Nats and Fish. If you subscribe to the Mets' e-newsletter, you could get the $69 seats for $47; same for tonight and tomorrow, all "value" dates. The $69 seats of Monday-Wednesday which become $92 on Friday for "bronze" seating are discounted to $64. Come Sunday, a "silver" date, they are reduced from $115 to $80. Some other seating areas have this "deal" as well. For a single baseball game. I'm not sure how the screw-you-over fees play into it. I do know they announced their highest attendance since Opening Night last night, though the place didn't seem particularly jammed. Details here[/url:3aujeem1]. Frayed Knot May 26 2009 12:31 PM ]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2009 01:31 PM ="Frayed Knot"]]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. All Promenade Infield-- a mix of value (2 @ $15), bronze (2 @ $20) and silver (5 @ $30). Also, forgot to carry ones-- ah, the perils of quickie math-- so add 100 to both sides (551, 592). Frayed Knot May 26 2009 02:00 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]="Frayed Knot"]]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. All Promenade Infield-- a mix of value (2 @ $15), bronze (2 @ $20) and silver (5 @ $30). Also, forgot to carry ones-- ah, the perils of quickie math-- so add 100 to both sides (551, 592). So - if I have this straight - that's 2 pairs of seats at $15/per seat = $60 total plus 2 pairs @ $20/per = 80 plus 5 pairs @ $30/per = 300 = total face $440 which would have cost $592 (an approx 34% increase!?!) to buy from the Mets but were instead bought over the secondary market for $551 metirish May 26 2009 02:08 PM Good work guys. That's one hell of a mark up , of course they would call it something else , price gouging seems about right.

its been a real rollercoaster season so far for the Padres from a hot start to 9 games under .500 to a 10 game win streak. i feel like the whole NL is wide open this year, there are no stand out teams and only one true loser.

]It's one thing if certain ways of obtaining a $20 ticket involve extra fees, but if EVERY way of getting it involves a fee then it's not really a $20 ticket is it ="Gwreck"]There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. yeah, that was pretty much the issue. eliminating the online fees would solve my problem as i could decide before i trek out there if its worth going or not. one more thing that annoyed me- at Shea there were signs above the ticket windows indicating which categories of tickets were still available that day and how much they cost. these signs were absent at Citi Field and would have saved me from 20+ minutes on line.

="Edgy DC":2bcjiidg]Doubly deceptive when adding the fee per ticket, rather than per transaction.[/quote:2bcjiidg] why do one? the mets do BOTH. not "deceptive" but "annoying" and "costing the mets my money" Gwreck May 26 2009 08:43 AM Like it or not, the Mets are hardly alone in this sort of ridiculous fee-adding. Ticketmaster and Tickets.com do the exact same thing. Frayed Knot May 26 2009 08:44 AM I think it is deceptive. Maybe not to the extent of illegal-deceptive - although if it isn't it's certainly close. It's one thing if certain ways of obtaining a $20 ticket involve extra fees, but if EVERY way of getting it involves a fee then it's not really a $20 ticket is it? Fman99 May 26 2009 08:47 AM ="Frayed Knot":1h410dhv]'The Hardball Times' did a whole article on this sort of thing[/url:1h410dhv] a week or so back.[/quote:1h410dhv] Wow, great article. Rarely in my life have I gotten screwed with less enjoyment than this. Gwreck May 26 2009 08:49 AM There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. Nymr83 May 26 2009 08:56 AM ]It's one thing if certain ways of obtaining a $20 ticket involve extra fees, but if EVERY way of getting it involves a fee then it's not really a $20 ticket is it ="Gwreck"]There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. yeah, that was pretty much the issue. eliminating the online fees would solve my problem as i could decide before i trek out there if its worth going or not. one more thing that annoyed me- at Shea there were signs above the ticket windows indicating which categories of tickets were still available that day and how much they cost. these signs were absent at Citi Field and would have saved me from 20+ minutes on line. batmagadanleadoff May 26 2009 09:50 AM I wonder if perhaps, those add on and processing fees are treated as separate from ticket sales revenue, and therefore, do not have to be shared with the opposition. Edgy DC May 26 2009 09:58 AM Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it? batmagadanleadoff May 26 2009 10:00 AM I'm not sure. That's why I perhapsed my post. But I was posting on the assumption that a certain percentage of the gate automatically went to the visiting team, no matter what. Nymr83 May 26 2009 10:01 AM ="Edgy DC":niwqtenf]Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it?[/quote:niwqtenf] I think he's talking about the percentage of ticket sales that goes to the visiting club, which predated the luxury tax and as far as i know continues today. Benjamin Grimm May 26 2009 10:02 AM I believe it does. Gate sharing has been around forever and is distinct from revenue sharing, which was introduced more recently as part of a collective bargaining agreement. Edgy DC May 26 2009 10:04 AM That's a good question, then. But owners kcertainly now enough not to let themselves get swindled by each other, no? Frayed Knot May 26 2009 10:32 AM ="Edgy DC"]Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it? Two separate things. Luxury tax is based on exceeding salary thresholds. Revenue sharing is based on various income lines and, yes, this all could be about that in the same way that's what luxury suites are all about. They're treated as rent rather than ticket sales and therefore aren't subject to the same cut of the gate as one Joe Sixpack buys. ]But owners kcertainly now enough not to let themselves get swindled by each other, no? Not necessarily. In the NFL - where ticket and broadcast money is all split nearly evenly - they were the first to rush into the luxury suite business (and demanding stadiums that accommodated them) and did so for the sole purpose of getting revenue they didn't have to share. Ditto PSLs. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2009 10:52 AM ="Gwreck"]There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. Funny thing-- as I've said a few times on here, the fiancee, a friend of mine and I cobbled together our "package" this year from Ebay-- with a little from Stubhub-- before single-gamers went on sale. With twenty minutes to kill until a lunch meeting, I just did the math. As it turns out, paying face-value or slightly above on Ebay-- where a good number of sellers offer free or discounted shipping-- has actually been about 41 dollars cheaper* than buying directly from the Mets would have been. (And that includes the Mother's Day game against the Pirates, for which I paid about 10 dollars over face per ticket.) *$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. G-Fafif May 26 2009 12:30 PM Yesterday was the first of six consecutive dates that had a Flushing Flash discount component available (first come/first served, buy in advance), indicating they had more inventory than planned for the Nats and Fish. If you subscribe to the Mets' e-newsletter, you could get the $69 seats for $47; same for tonight and tomorrow, all "value" dates. The $69 seats of Monday-Wednesday which become $92 on Friday for "bronze" seating are discounted to $64. Come Sunday, a "silver" date, they are reduced from $115 to $80. Some other seating areas have this "deal" as well. For a single baseball game. I'm not sure how the screw-you-over fees play into it. I do know they announced their highest attendance since Opening Night last night, though the place didn't seem particularly jammed. Details here[/url:3aujeem1]. Frayed Knot May 26 2009 12:31 PM ]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2009 01:31 PM ="Frayed Knot"]]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. All Promenade Infield-- a mix of value (2 @ $15), bronze (2 @ $20) and silver (5 @ $30). Also, forgot to carry ones-- ah, the perils of quickie math-- so add 100 to both sides (551, 592). Frayed Knot May 26 2009 02:00 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]="Frayed Knot"]]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. All Promenade Infield-- a mix of value (2 @ $15), bronze (2 @ $20) and silver (5 @ $30). Also, forgot to carry ones-- ah, the perils of quickie math-- so add 100 to both sides (551, 592). So - if I have this straight - that's 2 pairs of seats at $15/per seat = $60 total plus 2 pairs @ $20/per = 80 plus 5 pairs @ $30/per = 300 = total face $440 which would have cost $592 (an approx 34% increase!?!) to buy from the Mets but were instead bought over the secondary market for $551 metirish May 26 2009 02:08 PM Good work guys. That's one hell of a mark up , of course they would call it something else , price gouging seems about right.

]But saying that some seat is $20 is deceptive if there's no actual way of getting said seat for $20 i havent felt "deceived" (yet), the $11 and $15 tickets allegedly sold out yesterday before 5:00 but they had them earlier in the day (so said the ticket guy at whom i balked when he said $69 after i asked for "the cheapest seats you got left, sir")

="Triple Dee":3cwz40tm]="Gwreck":3cwz40tm] A $2.50 charge per order additional if you want to print them at home.[/quote:3cwz40tm] I'm intrigued to know what the rationale for this charge is. Aren't you actually saving them money by using your own ink and paper?[/quote:3cwz40tm] the "rationale" is that you previously could only pick them up day of game so any new options are an excuse to make more $$$$. it might be that these tickets are way easier to counterfeit than normal ones and thus cause them more headaches, i'm not knocking the 2.50 fee by itself its just overkill with the 4-7 +5 fees already there. I've never cared if i had "good" seats or not, its just about getting inside as cheap as i can for me, for a normal non-playoff game my personal threshold is likely about $35 (and i wouldnt go at all at that price if i couldnt bring my own food, kill that policy and my price goes down to $25) Assuming that the cans of Brooklyn Lager costy the Mets $1 each and the ingredients for a kosher italian sausage and a knish cost another $2, they lost about $20 in food sales from me last night (i eat all that even with the food i bring in, i'm a 6'5 pig with a big appetite) I also bought a deck of Mets playing cards last time. I've been considering a shot glass but decided on another beer instead last time i was there. I don't begrudge the Mets the opportunity to make what they can, I'm just observing that i think their calculations to maximize profits are a bit off. they probably had 2-3,000 empty seats yesterday in what could have been a sell out crowd, and thats alot of hot dog sales. Edgy DC May 26 2009 08:37 AM Doubly deceptive when adding the fee per ticket, rather than per transaction. Nymr83 May 26 2009 08:39 AM ]But saying that some seat is $20 is deceptive if there's no actual way of getting said seat for $20 i havent felt "deceived" (yet), the $11 and $15 tickets allegedly sold out yesterday before 5:00 but they had them earlier in the day (so said the ticket guy at whom i balked when he said $69 after i asked for "the cheapest seats you got left, sir") Nymr83 May 26 2009 08:40 AM ="Edgy DC":2bcjiidg]Doubly deceptive when adding the fee per ticket, rather than per transaction.[/quote:2bcjiidg] why do one? the mets do BOTH. not "deceptive" but "annoying" and "costing the mets my money" Gwreck May 26 2009 08:43 AM Like it or not, the Mets are hardly alone in this sort of ridiculous fee-adding. Ticketmaster and Tickets.com do the exact same thing. Frayed Knot May 26 2009 08:44 AM I think it is deceptive. Maybe not to the extent of illegal-deceptive - although if it isn't it's certainly close. It's one thing if certain ways of obtaining a $20 ticket involve extra fees, but if EVERY way of getting it involves a fee then it's not really a $20 ticket is it? Fman99 May 26 2009 08:47 AM ="Frayed Knot":1h410dhv]'The Hardball Times' did a whole article on this sort of thing[/url:1h410dhv] a week or so back.[/quote:1h410dhv] Wow, great article. Rarely in my life have I gotten screwed with less enjoyment than this. Gwreck May 26 2009 08:49 AM There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. Nymr83 May 26 2009 08:56 AM ]It's one thing if certain ways of obtaining a $20 ticket involve extra fees, but if EVERY way of getting it involves a fee then it's not really a $20 ticket is it ="Gwreck"]There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. yeah, that was pretty much the issue. eliminating the online fees would solve my problem as i could decide before i trek out there if its worth going or not. one more thing that annoyed me- at Shea there were signs above the ticket windows indicating which categories of tickets were still available that day and how much they cost. these signs were absent at Citi Field and would have saved me from 20+ minutes on line. batmagadanleadoff May 26 2009 09:50 AM I wonder if perhaps, those add on and processing fees are treated as separate from ticket sales revenue, and therefore, do not have to be shared with the opposition. Edgy DC May 26 2009 09:58 AM Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it? batmagadanleadoff May 26 2009 10:00 AM I'm not sure. That's why I perhapsed my post. But I was posting on the assumption that a certain percentage of the gate automatically went to the visiting team, no matter what. Nymr83 May 26 2009 10:01 AM ="Edgy DC":niwqtenf]Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it?[/quote:niwqtenf] I think he's talking about the percentage of ticket sales that goes to the visiting club, which predated the luxury tax and as far as i know continues today. Benjamin Grimm May 26 2009 10:02 AM I believe it does. Gate sharing has been around forever and is distinct from revenue sharing, which was introduced more recently as part of a collective bargaining agreement. Edgy DC May 26 2009 10:04 AM That's a good question, then. But owners kcertainly now enough not to let themselves get swindled by each other, no? Frayed Knot May 26 2009 10:32 AM ="Edgy DC"]Revenue sharing is based on exceeding the preset salary threshhold, isn't it? Two separate things. Luxury tax is based on exceeding salary thresholds. Revenue sharing is based on various income lines and, yes, this all could be about that in the same way that's what luxury suites are all about. They're treated as rent rather than ticket sales and therefore aren't subject to the same cut of the gate as one Joe Sixpack buys. ]But owners kcertainly now enough not to let themselves get swindled by each other, no? Not necessarily. In the NFL - where ticket and broadcast money is all split nearly evenly - they were the first to rush into the luxury suite business (and demanding stadiums that accommodated them) and did so for the sole purpose of getting revenue they didn't have to share. Ditto PSLs. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2009 10:52 AM ="Gwreck"]There is no service fee charged on tickets purchased in person at Citi Field. Hence the problem -- nymr83 went out there to save on these fees and buy his ticket in person, only to find that the affordable tickets had sold out. Funny thing-- as I've said a few times on here, the fiancee, a friend of mine and I cobbled together our "package" this year from Ebay-- with a little from Stubhub-- before single-gamers went on sale. With twenty minutes to kill until a lunch meeting, I just did the math. As it turns out, paying face-value or slightly above on Ebay-- where a good number of sellers offer free or discounted shipping-- has actually been about 41 dollars cheaper* than buying directly from the Mets would have been. (And that includes the Mother's Day game against the Pirates, for which I paid about 10 dollars over face per ticket.) *$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. G-Fafif May 26 2009 12:30 PM Yesterday was the first of six consecutive dates that had a Flushing Flash discount component available (first come/first served, buy in advance), indicating they had more inventory than planned for the Nats and Fish. If you subscribe to the Mets' e-newsletter, you could get the $69 seats for $47; same for tonight and tomorrow, all "value" dates. The $69 seats of Monday-Wednesday which become $92 on Friday for "bronze" seating are discounted to $64. Come Sunday, a "silver" date, they are reduced from $115 to $80. Some other seating areas have this "deal" as well. For a single baseball game. I'm not sure how the screw-you-over fees play into it. I do know they announced their highest attendance since Opening Night last night, though the place didn't seem particularly jammed. Details here[/url:3aujeem1]. Frayed Knot May 26 2009 12:31 PM ]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2009 01:31 PM ="Frayed Knot"]]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. All Promenade Infield-- a mix of value (2 @ $15), bronze (2 @ $20) and silver (5 @ $30). Also, forgot to carry ones-- ah, the perils of quickie math-- so add 100 to both sides (551, 592). Frayed Knot May 26 2009 02:00 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]="Frayed Knot"]]*$451.00 versus $492.50 over 9 pairs of seats-- or just over 2 dollars cheaper per ticket. Is it possible to know what the face value is for all those seats. All Promenade Infield-- a mix of value (2 @ $15), bronze (2 @ $20) and silver (5 @ $30). Also, forgot to carry ones-- ah, the perils of quickie math-- so add 100 to both sides (551, 592). So - if I have this straight - that's 2 pairs of seats at $15/per seat = $60 total plus 2 pairs @ $20/per = 80 plus 5 pairs @ $30/per = 300 = total face $440 which would have cost $592 (an approx 34% increase!?!) to buy from the Mets but were instead bought over the secondary market for $551 metirish May 26 2009 02:08 PM Good work guys. That's one hell of a mark up , of course they would call it something else , price gouging seems about right.

So people with Promenade tickets need to pay to get into the Promenade club? geez.

="Gwreck"]Were people buying the $69 (or more) seats? Or were they (like you) telling the Mets to shove it? I find it quite telling that the Mets have no problem moving their reasonably-priced tickets (most of which were gone as part of season ticket/plans) but there are always plenty of "middle" and "top" price tickets available to each game. more than half looked like they were leaving (or looking for a scalper, who were doing a brisk business and were fewer in number than usual) if i had taken the train and lived in the city leaving would have been an instant decision on my part, but having driven from staten island (and paid for parking) i wanted to see of the scalpers prices had gone down when the game actually started (a tactic that has led to great success at football games). they were practically nowhere to be found at that point. ]In stark contrast to previous years at Shea, where (logically) the best seats went first and the cheapest seats last, because of greater capacity and more reasonable pricing. well yeah, the loge section at Shea was tiny in terms of the number of seats, i'd guess it ad 1/3 of what field level had and maybe 1/2 of mezz. i guess now we know what 10,000 fewer seats really means because even though it was a "holiday" it was still a monday night in may, against the nationals, without santana, and a "work/school" night.

we showed up at Citi Field about 5:40 tonight, the line for tickets was long and moving VERY slowly, why you might ask? because there wasn't a ticket in the house under $69 and everuone in front of us was just as ticked off as we were. i won't be back this year (or in the future) unless they get rid of the ridiculous $10 per ticket surcharge on mets.com, because i'm sure not showing up without a ticket ever again. [edit- i just tried it as an experiment and its now $4 per seat + $5 for the entire order + $2.50 per seat to print them (why??) ]

Great win. GREAT GREAT win. this team is in a world of trouble when they go back to playing by normal rules Monday though. something needs to happen to have a full bench available.

="metirish":2itxms9x]The Wesley Snipes defence[/quote:2itxms9x] I think Snipes was actualyl one of those people who denied the legitimacy of the system (as opposed to saying "whoops, i interpreted this in a completely unbelievable way"

Nick Green almost made sure Mets fans couldnt complain about Martinez anymore with that slide...

="Kong76":3282zh40]That was an epic flare off the bat of Rodriguez, he's a true champion.[/quote:3282zh40] it helped the Mets out indirectly, therefore he is not clutch. John Cougar Lunchbucket May 23 2009 05:58 PM Elster, Seawolf and Steve J. Rogers just getting back from the Stadium now, probably. Perhaps they will join us here for the Mets game. metirish May 23 2009 06:04 PM Rogers took them to The Yankee Tavern for a few beers. Triple Dee May 24 2009 03:57 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 24 2009 04:13 AM ="Ceetar":3ocnox73]and another. They should think about signing Bonds. I'm sure he can still DH and pop up to RF for 85+ HR.[/quote:3ocnox73] Well, it's good to see the MFY's are considerate enough to cater for their fans who may be feeling nostalgic about their team during the Steriod era. Triple Dee May 24 2009 04:11 AM ="Frayed Knot":f1kidtq8] several problems I think: 1) this stadium is so far out-doing the pre-humidor Coors in it's early days and Coors was unlike anything MLB had seen up to that point. Now it's still just a small sample and I suspect things will calm down at least a bit over time, but the fact that it's so far out of whack is what has tongues wagging [/quote:f1kidtq8] Or Mo's cinnamon-scented farts are blowing the balls out of the park. Frayed Knot May 24 2009 08:07 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 24 2009 08:35 AM Single season record = 303, Coors Field, 1999 And that one was at a mile high, pre-humidor, and in the midst of the steroid era. Current pace at YSIII = 309 Edgy DC May 24 2009 08:26 AM And A-Rod is just getting started. MFS62 May 24 2009 08:38 AM ="Frayed Knot":8fjosmmd]Single season record = 303, Coors Field, 1999 And that one was at a mile high, pre-humidor, and in the midst of the steroid era. Current pace at YSIII = 309[/quote:8fjosmmd] If Jeter hits the one that breaks the record, will it be considered a good thing or a bad thing? By us? By MLB? By Jon Sterling? By Yankee fans in general? Later Frayed Knot May 24 2009 11:58 AM Maybe it's time for John Sterling to update his home-run call: It's not high ... It's not far ... But it's gone anyway!!! Frayed Knot May 24 2009 02:49 PM Teixeira today with a broken bat. Not a cracked bat mind you but one that shattered in his hands leaving him only with a small piece of the handle while the barrel and splinters flew all over the infield. The ball went about 7 rows deep into LF. MFS62 May 24 2009 05:20 PM So, what this all boils down to is, Yankee Stadium, the place that Yankee fans consider to be the "temple of baseball" - is now a joke. Just like the names they used to call Shea. And there's no way they can spin it. I'm lovin' every minute of this. Later Willets Point May 24 2009 06:42 PM With all the homeruns flying out of the new ballpark, I suggest that we start calling in Yankee Stadium 3-D! Swan Swan H May 24 2009 07:05 PM Haw! Wouldn't it be fun to see all those empty suits and swinging dicks scattered through millionaires' row wearing 3-D glasses? Fman99 May 24 2009 09:09 PM ="MFS62":3mg1jjda]So, what this all boils down to is, Yankee Stadium, the place that Yankee fans consider to be the "temple of baseball" - is now a joke. Just like the names they used to call Shea. And there's no way they can spin it. I'm lovin' every minute of this. Later[/quote:3mg1jjda] I hadn't thought of it that way but I approve of your logic. Elster88 May 27 2009 05:58 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 27 2009 06:19 PM ="Frayed Knot":uay8wvqu]Teixeira today with a broken bat. Not a cracked bat mind you but one that shattered in his hands leaving him only with a small piece of the handle while the barrel and splinters flew all over the infield. The ball went about 7 rows deep into LF.[/quote:uay8wvqu] Listening to sports talk on a random station in DC they played the radio call of this play. The hosts ripped up Sterling both for the cartoonish-style call and for not mentioning that Texeira broke his bat. It seems that they know what an idiot that guy is around the country. Elster88 May 27 2009 05:59 PM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":su3m89ss]Elster, Seawolf and Steve J. Rogers just getting back from the Stadium now, probably. Perhaps they will join us here for the Mets game.[/quote:su3m89ss] Now that's just insulting. Elster88 May 27 2009 06:39 PM ="metirish":37124ase]Rogers took them to The Yankee Tavern for a few beers.[/quote:37124ase] The bartender kept trying to impress me by talking about all these awards his liquor won in the fifties back before they had draft beer. seawolf17 May 27 2009 06:59 PM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2b607477]Elster, Seawolf and Steve J. Rogers just getting back from the Stadium now, probably. Perhaps they will join us here for the Mets game.[/quote:2b607477] Huh? John Cougar Lunchbucket May 27 2009 07:39 PM ="seawolf17":1hdt22ta]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":1hdt22ta]Elster, Seawolf and Steve J. Rogers just getting back from the Stadium now, probably. Perhaps they will join us here for the Mets game.[/quote:1hdt22ta] Huh?[/quote:1hdt22ta] Just busting yer Yankee-Lovin chops. Say hi to Hank for me. seawolf17 May 27 2009 07:44 PM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":22bx65ep]="seawolf17":22bx65ep]="John Cougar Lunchbucket":22bx65ep]Elster, Seawolf and Steve J. Rogers just getting back from the Stadium now, probably. Perhaps they will join us here for the Mets game.[/quote:22bx65ep] Huh?[/quote:22bx65ep] Just busting yer Yankee-Lovin chops. Say hi to Hank for me.[/quote:22bx65ep] Double huh? duan Jun 08 2009 06:27 AM ="Willets Point":14bhkrrc]With all the homeruns flying out of the new ballpark, I suggest that we start calling in Yankee Stadium 3-D![/quote:14bhkrrc] has this calmed down at all? Frayed Knot Jun 08 2009 06:38 AM Slightly. 100 HRs in 28 games: 53 by Yanx, 47 by opponents. That's still a ton but, at 3.57/game, the pace is down from when it was closer to 4/per. And that's just lower enough to where they're no longer on pace to break the Coors Field 1999 mark. Frayed Knot Jun 08 2009 07:59 PM 5 more HRs tonight 105 in 29 games 3.62/game = 293 for the season Record is 303 in Coors Field 1999 Also, Teixeira, Cano, Damon & Cabrera are on pace for their best HR seasons of their career (by 8, 7, 10 & 9) Jeter & Swisher are on a pace to about equal their bests Leaving the only regulars who aren't on a personal record pace as the 35 y/o Matsui, plus ARod & Posada who both missed about half the season so far. soupcan Jun 09 2009 08:23 AM Makes me curious as to what our homer-weary boys will do this weekend at the band-box in the Bronx. HahnSolo Jun 09 2009 09:10 AM The Damon HR was comical last night. When he hit the ball, he put his head down in disgust that he had popped the ball up. It landed three rows over the wall. Didn't stop Sterling from calling it a "Johnny Rocket" I bet. soupcan Jun 09 2009 09:13 AM IT IS HIGH...up! IT IS...not so...FAR! However, IT....IS....GONE! LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jun 09 2009 09:33 AM ="HahnSolo":1nvohjim]The Damon HR was comical last night. When he hit the ball, he put his head down in disgust that he had popped the ball up. It landed three rows over the wall. Didn't stop Sterling from calling it a "Johnny Rocket" I bet.[/quote:1nvohjim] Was there last night. The Damon one was indeed ridiculous... but the Jeter one (just making the seats) and even the Swisher one (a well-struck but lazy fly that ended up carrying a shit-ton and landing past the first seating area in right-center) weren't far behind. By the third, the fans were standing up for any flyball into the gap. I'm thinking Churchy and Muffy-- hell, Cora, even-- should start aiming at the Subway sign during Phils BP... this weekend could make for some nice number inflation. Frayed Knot Jun 10 2009 06:27 AM Newsday: Fences are shorter http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/ny-spstad0611,0,3247160.story excerpts: The barrage of home runs at new Yankee Stadium is being caused by shorter dimensions, not weather, according to AccuWeather.com. The meteorology company said Tuesday that 20 of the 105 home runs hit at the $1.5 billion ballpark would not have gone out of the old Yankee Stadium. "For someone attending a game at the new Yankee Stadium or watching on TV, the size of the playing field appears to be the same," AccuWeather meteorologist Tim Buckley said in a statement Tuesday. {I guess he's got a reason to believe} "The dimensions at select corners of the field are identical -- and the posted numbers on the walls reflect that. However, detailed schematics of the park reveal some nuances that have significant implications." AccuWeather agreed with the conclusions of Greg Rybarczyk of hittrackeronline.com, who said in April that right field in the new ballpark was shorter. The Yankee insist that the dimensions are exactly the same. "The wall structure is slightly different than the old park," AccuWeather said. "The main difference involves curvature. The gentle curve from right field to center field seen in original Yankee Stadium has largely been eliminated at the new stadium ... due in large part to the presence of a manual scoreboard embedded within the wall. Losing this curvature has resulted in a right field that is shorter by four-to-five feet on average, but up to nine feet in spots. "Not only is the famed short porch even shorter in the new stadium, but the walls themselves are not as tall. In the old ballpark, the walls in right field stood at a height of approximately 10 feet. At this height, it was difficult for outfielders to scale the wall and attempt to rob a home run over the fence. Fast forward to 2009, and the outfielders have been scaling the wall without any trouble. The result? The new outfield fences only rise to a height of eight feet, adding to the ease hitting a home run to right." The new Yankee Stadium is on pace for 293 homers, 10 shy of the major league record hit at Denver's Coors Field in 1999 and an 83 percent increase from the 160 hit at original Yankee Stadium, last year. Frayed Knot Jun 18 2009 08:15 PM Today's (night's) 3-0 MFY loss to the Nats was, I believe, the first no-homer game in YSIII this season. seawolf17 Jun 18 2009 08:37 PM The MFYs had a little case of Metsflu tonight, getting shut out by a kid fresh off a high school ballfield somewhere. (A guy against whom, of course, the Mets bucked convention and beat recently.)

martinez sucks but santana gets out of it. get that clown off the roster, i'd rather have a minor leaguer who can field and not hit for 2 weeks

Ashie62 wrote: balls.. I can see the schmooze..Reyes would have caught that Martinez = NOT a ss anymore

]MADISON, Wis. -- Former major league pitcher Jerry Koosman has pleaded guilty to federal tax evasion and could face up to one year in prison. (Merged from Uncle Sam comes after ex-Met, 5/22/2009)

="OlerudOwned":3g5bq3dh]="smg58":3g5bq3dh]Johan had a full no-trade clause as well; not sure if we were luckier, or more generous, or simply dealing with a more reasonable player. Which brings us to the obvious question: why would any even vaguely competent GM give a no-trade clause to a player who is already under his team's control? If you're that concerned about saving a few dollars in the negotiating process, then it's only a matter of time before the player in question becomes too expensive to keep anyway.[/quote:3g5bq3dh] Players like having a choice in where they get traded to. Unless every front office colludes on stopping the practice, there's going to be at least one franchise willing to go that road to sweeten the pot.[/quote:3g5bq3dh] its all about MONEY, if the player thinks the clause is worth more than the team thinks its worth (how many less dollars did peavy take to get the clause?) then both sides are happy with it. Frayed Knot May 21 2009 08:26 PM ="smg58"]Johan had a full no-trade clause as well; not sure if we were luckier, or more generous, or simply dealing with a more reasonable player. He was also on the verge of Free-Agency and used his No-Trade Clause to, in effect, negotiate a FA contract a year before he would have otherwise been able to. Smart move as it turned out. If he came out this year he would have had to compete with the likes of Burnett & Sabathia (something he may have foresaw) and in a bad economy (something he probably didn't). Peavy, on the other hand, is already signed through 2012. ]Which brings us to the obvious question: why would any even vaguely competent GM give a no-trade clause to a player who is already under his team's control? If you're that concerned about saving a few dollars in the negotiating process, then it's only a matter of time before the player in question becomes too expensive to keep anyway. I guess if that's the final piece that gets the player to agree to a deal rather than take it on a year-by-year basis then the GM offers it. Santana having that power prior to ever reaching FA-gency was an unusual case. Ceetar May 22 2009 07:25 AM Given how Peavy's pitched in the playoffs, and how he seems to be scared of the AL, I think i'm glad the Mets don't seem to be considering him at all.

="G-Fafif":5dwf03mu]Is that deal for Barry Larkin still on the table?[/quote:5dwf03mu] Sure, but first you'll have to track down the other components to the trade that Barry rejected, like Jason Tyner TheOldMole May 21 2009 11:53 AM ] Maybe a signee can be the parkee. I believe I have never seen that sentence before. Swan Swan H May 21 2009 12:03 PM I can't find it now, but I read recently that David Eckstein is in the outs in San Diego. This is exactly the kind of guy the GMs like to bring in at times like this, all character and hustle and such. Boy, I hope not. I love the Keppinger idea LWFS floated earlier. He can't get a lot of time in Houston, and he'd be a(nother) good RH bat on the bench when Reyes returns. John Cougar Lunchbucket May 21 2009 12:16 PM Bluh. The Mets and Keppinger hated each other, and they thought he wasn't strong enough defensively to play 2B. Ruben Tejada is the Bingo shortstop and reportedly has good leather. He actually hit 300 during spring training with the big boys, though he's at 230-something at Bingo and has little power, but decent batting eye. Swan Swan H May 21 2009 12:19 PM You're going by what the Mets thought? smg58 May 21 2009 12:21 PM Tell me two things: How long will Reyes and Cora be out. How much would these other shortstops cost. No sense paying much for a temporary fix, assuming that's all we need. I certainly wouldn't object to Eckstein if he comes for close to nothing. Keppinger as well. The Indians are looking for major-league ready pitching, and I'd have to know I'd need DeRosa to play regularly the rest of the way before I'd consider parting with Niese or hurting our pen for him. But if a package that includes Niese could get us DeRosa and Cliff Lee, that's another story. PS In case you were wondering, Will Flores currently has a .573 OPS in Savannah. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 21 2009 12:38 PM ="smg58":3pen28kq] But if a package that includes Niese could get us DeRosa and Cliff Lee, that's another story.[/quote:3pen28kq] I like Niese. I'm not sure I-- or anyone in MLB-- likes Niese as much as you do, good (fashseeshus?) sir. Also, regardless of whether Reyes is out for a week or a month and a half, DeRosa plays-- literally-- every position on the diamond except pitcher and catcher, and will be a useful semi-regular part. He's like SuperJoe with power. (Although his age-28 comp proves that the B-R gods have a sense of humor.) I don't know that any of the guys I mentioned comes for close-to-nothing. Paying for ML starters than are anything above "replacement-level" will generally cost at least a midlevel prospect (Niese, Havens) and/or middle-of-the-road major-leaguer (Stokes?) who fills a need. G-Fafif May 21 2009 12:54 PM Rubin[/url:3i2j2o54]: Mets saying Reyes is day-to-day, that it's tendinitis, that he can't hurt it any worse, that everything's fine, return to your homes. We still need at least a backup shortstop. metirish May 21 2009 01:07 PM ="G-Fafif":1lu5mzns]Rubin[/url:1lu5mzns]: Mets saying Reyes is day-to-day, that it's tendinitis, that he can't hurt it any worse, that everything's fine, return to your homes. We still need at least a backup shortstop.[/quote:1lu5mzns] I need JCL to translate day to day tendinitis for me. John Cougar Lunchbucket May 21 2009 01:09 PM tendonitis sucks. Only cure is rest! soupcan May 21 2009 01:19 PM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2bjm181f]tendonitis sucks. Only cure is rest![/quote:2bjm181f] I was thinking the same thing. Maybe a professional athlete in his 20s has a different experience in terms of tolerance and recovery but... TheOldMole May 21 2009 01:26 PM I had a torn miniscus and couldn't walk, but guys play NFL football with it. G-Fafif May 21 2009 01:29 PM I had tendinitis in one of my two typing hands when I was in my late twenties. I was day-to-day, but pecked through the pain. It took time and treatment. Same thing about a dozen years later. soupcan May 21 2009 02:02 PM ="G-Fafif":282jerju]I had tendinitis in one of my two typing hands when I was in my late twenties. I was day-to-day, but pecked through the pain. It took time and treatment. Same thing about a dozen years later.[/quote:282jerju] That's called 'heart'. G-Fafif May 21 2009 02:18 PM That's called not having a guaranteed contract. Or a deep bench. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 21 2009 02:54 PM ="G-Fafif":8ksamv8g]I had tendinitis in one of my two typing hands when I was in my late twenties. I was day-to-day, but pecked through the pain. It took time and treatment. Same thing about a dozen years later.[/quote:8ksamv8g] Yes, but do you write with the same initial 'burst' you once had? And I don't wanna return to my home-- I've already whipped up my makeshift torch and Mark DeRosa wig for the rioting. G-Fafif May 21 2009 03:07 PM Sometimes I'm a little slow to the space bar. TheOldMole May 21 2009 03:49 PM Is that the one that Whoopi Goldberg/Guinan operated? G-Fafif May 21 2009 03:50 PM I couldn't get past the fuzzy rope. Edgy DC May 21 2009 05:22 PM ="TheOldMole"]] Maybe a signee can be the parkee. I believe I have never seen that sentence before. I'm trying to get quoted in The Writing Careers Examiner.

]Sending Tatis up there instead of Sheffield. D+. Tatis is your last shortstop in a game where pinch-hitting for your struggling current shortstop needs to remain an option and would eventually happen. Sheffield's position is a hitter, and we needed one of those Although i wanted him up there for Muphy, no Church, i have no problem using Tatis over Sheff. Tatis is the better hitter to me, especially a pinch-hitter (if the numbers dont back me up on that then maybe i'm wrong, this is just based on my perception)